We’ve all had that absolutely frustrating moment when we make a read that our opponent is going to break, counter-break, only to find that we counter broke JUST a bit too late (and by “just a bit” I mean to the naked eye the counter-break and the lockout look simultaneous) and get full combo punished. This is a huge momentum killer and often times loses someone the round/match, even though the correct read was made.
I was thinking that when you counter-break while your opponent is locked out, it pushes both players back to neutral (i.e. like a tech throw or you both flip out) and the offensive player loses all potential damage (to prevent abusing it for reset opportunities). This prevents the defensive player from getting rewarded for an incorrect break attempt and the offensive player being punished for being the slightest bit late.
Just an idea I had. I’m open to hear why this won’t work and why the current system is fine, but I’m curious either way.
I personally don’t see why you would even be able to do a counter-breaker attempt while your opponent is locked out. I’m fine with it if they disable counter bluff entirely for the duration of the lockout. You might drop your combo if you are late on your bluff attempt but at least your not wide open entirely.
I get that when I input counter breaker during my opponents lockout and my opponent is mashing breaker anyway, I will get him with it but if that is the reasoning behind it, shouldn’t you be able to bluff each and every part of a combo, including openers, unbreakable hits and whatnot?
I don’t like the idea of disabling counter-breaks entirely. I don’t think it’s right that you get full combo punished, but I don’t want it to be brainless either. Plus, I think it would be equally as frustrating being on the other side of it. Like, I hit the wrong breaker sure, but this guy just hit counter break but he gets to continue the combo? I don’t like that. Takes some risk out of counter breaking.
Well, it wouldn’t be brainless. You would only use counter-breakers in a situation where your opponent is not locked out so the risk is the same. But it’s not ideal, I agree with you there.
About your solution, I think it basically comes down to being broken. Maybe if the white life remains, it would be better. That would happen on a dud bluff also. Maybe, instead of there being no command during lockout, they could replace it with a quick-ender, like ultra enders, ending the combo but leaving white life and creating some space between you and your opponent, no frame advantage either. I can see such a mechanic leading up to all kinds of weird setups. But none of them would be better than actually doing the damage and ending your combo since your opponent is locked out. Probably.
I’m also pretty much fine with how it is, btw. I just think it’s inconsistent with other situations where counter breakers bluffs are impossible. If you can counter bluff during lockouts, it should always be possible to bluff during combo’s and under all circumstances where you opponent can’t break. Eg. Why not during enders?
The only reason I suggest that potential damage is lost is because some characters could abuse the mechanic as a reset mechanic better than others. I still want there to be risk involved with counter breaking, but I really don’t think it’s right how I get full combo punished for being 1 frame late on the correct read is all.
But hey, with the new changes to the breaker system I’m not counter breaking anymore anyway so I’m fine either way
I brought this up in another thread didn’t know someone came up with the same conclusion.
thread was here
I think that maybe if missed counters did in fact just act like a break situation (50% of pd gone on missed counter, and return to neutral) would be good for the defender that is patient. You should reward that defender for holding out, so perhaps give them the advantage but enough time for offender to place a defense. So say the offender after a failed counter is at -1 or something, a state in which they can’t say, “well i countered I missed so ill dp to stop defender’s next move” but that it is no longer their turn and give the defender that was patient a 50/50 scenario. The defender can mount an offense to turn the tide, or they can back off to reduce their PD.
Well, they could still DP at -1. Anything short of -5 and the DP is beating out even jabs, but if you make it -5 might as well just leave it as is since it’ll be throw punishable anyway which is what people use to punish whiffed counter breakers 99% of the time anyway.
sure can still dp, but i meant a pause for both players like a tech is what I meant to get at.